bluecalm

Yeah I am not convinced to 4NT either. Just saying is one option worth considering. I agree with your arguments against it. It for sure works sometimes though but I agree taht dbl probably works better/more often.

Btw, any of you play version of RKCB where you can show void along with 2 keycards and queen ? (or later after queen ask?). It seems that it would solve the problem of this hand as well.

I think the way to play in standard'ish system is to have : 1♦ - 1M 2♦ - 3♦ available as not full invite and playing 2♦ as wide range. That's being said I don't like standardish systems. In precision 3♦ is a must and then you wouldn't feel bad about cuebidding at all as partner really can't play you for much stronger hand (many 15hcp with 6diamonds or 14hcp with 7 diamonds could open 1♣). As it went I think bidding 6NT is huge error. I don't think "playing for 15hcp" is plausible at all. Invite is invite and not "15 hcp", what if opener had 8 diamonds ? Would we expect him to bid 2♦ ?

4NT and 5♦ after 5♣ makes sense if that means 2suiter. I am not sure if that's better than dbl though.

I like the way Frances described. My first instinct was 3m = NF but I've changed my mind.

Btw, by semipositives I meant bid which are 6-9pc or 6+ or 5-9pc ie. bids which doesn't establish gf but contain gf.

I wonder how well a pair need to perform to qualify. We made 2 judgement errors which lead to suboptimal results and one huge systemic error which led to major disaster. Any comments from other participants ? (without specific bid hands of course).

Hmm so you can tell me our score now right ? :(

2♦ in poilsh club (where 1♦ is 5+ unless 4-4-4-1 or 5-4 minors). 2♣ in my preferred system (precision). I don't much care about stops. If two balanced hands meet I am happy to bash 3NT and hope.

1♥ - 2♥ 4♥ For me in in uncontested auction is 100% but I am used to playing 2♥ showing something as openers are either up to 17 or up to 15.

I wonder how contracts will be scored. For example if you bid game which depends on first lead, what score will be assigned ? I find scoring hands in MP's instead of IMPs is very difficult. I wonder how it will work out.

I agree with it. I don't like playing semipositives for this reason. As to transfers I am sure they can be good solution. From what I know Sabine Auken with her partner were coached by Martens and they play some kind of transfers over 1♣ (as Martens loves transfers). I think it require a lot of work and gains are relatively small and risk of disaster high though. Either you discovered some new ways of "murdering" or your opponents, to put it mildly, don't have much clue. I love when people jump around with nothing against our strong club (one of the main reasons to play prec for me). Also Meckwell won 5 world championship and tons of other major tournament during 20+years of international career and no one knows how to "murder them". Meanwhile no pair playing semi positives or some kind of control system had major international achievements in last 10 years.

People play various stuff. I like simple way based on how Meckwell play: After the interference: -All bids without a jump are natural and game forcing (including NT) -All suits with jump are natural, inviting but not game forcing (1♣ - 1♥ - 2♠ = KJTxxx xx xx xxx fits the bill perfectly) -Opponent's suit is game forcing without 5card suit and stopper in their suit -Double: at 1 and 2 level it's 6-7hcp any hand (good 5 possible) at 3 level and higher it's game forcing -opener's double is always for takeout -3rd double is always for penalty -pass is forcing if: we made game forcing call we made semipositive call and they jump to 4 level we opened 1♣ and they jump to 5 level If pass is forcing then pass/double inversion applies (here you can play several ways you need to discuss those situations with your partner). After double: -pass = 0-5 any hand -1♦ = 6-7 any hand -rdbl/other depends on what version of precision you play but it makes sense to put all balanced hands in rdbl and made other bids game forcing and natural. I don't know what to play after non natural overcalls which doesn't show any specific suit. I suspect playing dbl as game forcing balanced and other bids as natural and game forcing is the way to go. I believe this system is not perfect as for example playing transfers makes a lot of sense. The advantage of this system is that: -you can quickly establish gf and show 5card suits -you have simple agreements which apply to almost all situations

Can you please give some approximate time when it will run ? We are travelling a lot during holidays and I would like to be sure it's not during one of the scheduled trips.

bluecalm/redds It's holidays season and we often don't have access to the internet (one or the other) what is the schedule for those?

♥ for me. Normal attacking lead in what is probably our 9card suit. Spade could work because one of the plans for declarer is cross ruff or ruffing 2 clubs in hand. I doubt we can do much about it anyway and if crossruff is going to work they had easy game probably. I find leading a ♣ suicidal it just helps declare with his plan whatever it is.

Playing the style I prefer I wouldn't pass. I like "weak two" to be just weak opening and not "preempt" with any random crap. I hate the thought of not playing game if partner tables standard hand: KQJxxx xx xx Kxx.

I am really not happy with bidding 4♥ unless I have at least 6-4, spade shortness and very offensive hand. I can't imagine bidding 4♥ having only 5-4 no matter how strong my hand is I hope you agree with that. It's probably one of those things dependent on area. Here in Poland we always double having 4♥. It was necessity when playing negative free bids (standard here) but nowadays people mainly play transfers but still: 1♣ - 1♠ - 2♣ (diamonds) usually denies 4♥. On 3 level, for example: 1♦ - (2♠) - 3♣ I can't imagine anybody here having 4♥. I've notice people from North America have other views (that's why I started my original post with "americans"...).

Americans... 100% double with 4♥ no matter how many points or diamonds you have imo. The problem with such thinking is that in modern bridge there will often be no chance for "then" or "then" will have to come at 4 level which you don't want. The most important thing to show is 4♥ before they jump to 3♠/4♠.

Very simple hand. While S's double was certainly very aggressive and maybe just insane it has some ways to win and can't lose that much on average. Maybe even 4♥ down one will beat -110 in 3♦. N's pass is just crazy. It would be bad at equal vulnerability but at red vs white it's one of the worst bid I saw in a while :( Opening 1♦ with W's hand is difficult to judge not knowing the system they use. In standard 1NT is clear cut, how it is even a question ? What about: 1♦ - 2♣ ???? Where your carefully chosen agreements (whatever they are) just collapse... (again assuming standard).

I think it should show strength of game invite while weak hand with 6+♥ is in lebensohl (or w/e you play there).

Imagine that over 1♦ opening we play all the 1♥/2♥/3♥/4♥/5♥/6♥/7♥ bids as showing heartsl ! Being a little disjont after 3M doesn't worry my at all...

Yes I think it's very close and depends very much on system/style and on your preferred way of losing (by going down in games or by not bidding them) :D I definitely prefer going down and I hate +150's :-)

I think double should strongly discourage partner from bidding. He will pass even with ♥ stiff barring some really wild hands. If we don't adopt this agreement we will be in the world of pain with hand like: xx KQx xx A9xxxx because there will be no way to tell partner "let's defend". I am not talking only about this sequence but about whole bidding philosophy. Double as "somewhat defensive hand or really defensive hand or pure penalty" is not going to work. Also we will produce strange bidding phenomena when the more our hands are suitable for doubling them (trump stack in one, shortness in the other) the more likely we will be competing in our suit.

His point is this: Assume the distribution of tricks we can take in NT is something like that: 40% - 9 tricks 40% - 8 tricks 20% - 7 tricks Now bidding 3NT compared to pass : (assume for simplicty 100 hands) Wins 6imps in 40 hands Loses 5 imps in 40 hands Loses 2imps in 20 hands Which makes it exactly break even proposition despite game being below "needed" 45% not vulnerable. I admit that this effect is negligible when hands are balanced and we are bidding NT (if one hand holds 6card suit for example the game may depend on which side establish their tricks first and the distribution may look like 40-30-30 for example which makes bidding 3NT +0.3imp decision despite game being still only 40%). Actually I thought about it a lot and we have agreement when playing polish club that with 15 count opener needs to make a move himself so 2NT is always 11/weak 12. This was possible because 1NT is solid in PC. I think this situation is difficult and I don't think passing is clear error but if anybody could do something differently it's opener.